Will you also be citing ECMA-404 normatively to avoid this sort of divergence in the future?
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Tim Bray <tbray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
To do this, I think the draft requires these changes:- Remove the trailing section of section 1.2, starting with “ECMAscript 5.1 enumerates...” [because the difference no longer exists]- In section 2:-- remove “A JSON text is a serialized object or array.”-- Insert: “A JSON text is a serialized value. Note that certain previous specifications of JSON constrained a JSON text to be an object or an array. Implementations which generate only objects or arrays where a JSON text is called for will be interoperable in the sense that all implementations will accept these as conforming JSON texts.”-- Change the JSON-text production to read:JSON-text = valueOn Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Matt Miller (mamille2) <mamille2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:There appears to be consensus to change JSON-text to allow for any JSON value -- not just object / array -- while noting that object or array as the top-level is the most interoperable.
We will ask the Document Editor to make this change to draft-ietf-json-rfc4627bis.
- Paul Hoffman and Matt Miller
_______________________________________________
json mailing list
json@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json